Open study

is now brainly

With Brainly you can:

  • Get homework help from millions of students and moderators
  • Learn how to solve problems with step-by-step explanations
  • Share your knowledge and earn points by helping other students
  • Learn anywhere, anytime with the Brainly app!

A community for students.

Jimmy’s proof: Statement 1: In triangle ADC and BCD, AD = BC (opposite sides of a rectangle are congruent) Statement 2: Angle ADC = Angle BCD (angles of a rectangle are 90°) Statement 3: DC=DC (transitive property of equality) Statement 4: Triangle ADC and BCD are congruent (by SAS postulate) Statement 5: AC = BD (by CPCTC) Which statement in Jimmy’s proof has an error?

I got my questions answered at in under 10 minutes. Go to now for free help!
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.

Join Brainly to access

this expert answer


To see the expert answer you'll need to create a free account at Brainly

1 Attachment
no error
yeah apparently there is no error !!

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question

Other answers:

Yippee!!Cheers for Jimmy!!
no i think there can be a mistake in statement five ..... if you consider each statement independent of each other then in statement 5 the student have not mentioned the congruent triangle so may be it can be considered as incorrect ever though the relation is correct
I guess.. there could be an error in statement 1 , where he says that "opposite sides of a rectangle are congruent)" but .. as far as i know, you never say they are 'congruent', you always say they are 'equal'! :/
if u consider each statement independent then statement 4 is also wrong as u cannot say 2 triangles are congruent without proof or reason.....
thats CPCTC may be incorrect ....
as far as i know its CPCT[Corresponding Parts of Congruent Triangles] NOT CPCTC
nah CPCTC is rite its [Corresponding Parts of Congruent Triangles are Congruent]
@Hashir : Naah, 'CPCTC' is absolutely correct.. because.. he already proved that the 2 triangles are equal by SAS postulate..
i am saying that there may be a possibility .... if we consider each statement independent
CPCTC ('Corresponding parts of congruent triangles are congruent') is nothing but another name/abbr. for CPCT ..
Okay Conclusion:Jimmy is an over-cautious idiot trying to find a mistake in an absolutely correct proof!!
so 3 has a problem ... 3 is incorrect ... got it now
whats wrong in 3??DC=DC is not true?
bro in transitive property we prove that if a=b and b=c then a=c .... not a=a !!!
it doesnt make any sense
@Hashir : I totally agree with you!!.. transitive property is --> if a=b, and b=c .. a=c! :P
it can be correct if he says that DC=CD
but he didnt say that
oh!ok!i did not know that!!so yes Jimmy being over-cautious helped him as @Hashir the detective finds the criminal eluding his 2 pardnas!

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question